It seems to me that if Jesus hadn't risen from the dead, their would be no Christians. From their own account, the apostles and disciples were simple, uneducated, poor, even cowardly men who didn't want any trouble. Following some guy around who preached allot was probably the the craziest thing they'd done in their lives. When this man was crucified for the confusing charge of both being a king and an instigator, his followers should have known the game was up. In fact, the most famous of his followers abandoned him after a feeble attempt to save him, then denied he even knew the guy three times, just to be on the safe side. Some time after this, the followers of Jesus can be found forming somewhat large communities in Jerusalem and elsewhere. But Jesus is dead, and the Jews are trying to suppress this unhealthy offshoot of their faith. One pious Jew, named Saul, is determined to root it out, and he goes to Damascus to find all the Christians there and put them on trial. But when he gets to Damascus, he proclaims himself a Christian. Saul's companions say that his heart was changed by a miracle, but most people don't believe it. Not even the Christians do. Never the less this nut-case starts running all over the Mediterranean world preaching some upstart religion, enduring stonings, imprisonments, and shipwrecks along the way. And what did he get for all this? Nothing. He was beheaded in Rome. His followers? Well the Romans blamed them for starting a wildfire in the World's most powerful city, so they were killed by the hundreds. Romans really got a kick out of killing people. When the flames subsided, the Christians were a bit singed, and the polls were showing a steady decline in paganism. Two thousand years later, here are the Christians, still blabbering about Christ rising from the dead. Well all I can say is, Zeus certainly hasn't.

Shroud of Turrin

Shroud of Turrin proves it for me. There is so much evidence that the stories of the crucifixion and resurrection are real. Must our society doubt everything? We're all such liars that we don't believe anything anymore. It's a sad sad world my friend. Jesus rising from the dead is what saves us. Just be thankful people. Geez.

Ther is no evidence.

That's the answer, the lack of phisical material to prove to our over rational minds which overpopulate the earth these days eliminating brilliant philosofers and religious people from the society, is the one that shows us he did, there is no body, clearly, and to prove to many out there who believe his body was hidden, I invite you to take in mind the existance of the 12 apostols and their mission and travel in Europe, not to mention the shroud of Torino.

We live in a scientific era where everything is numbers and only numbers can prove it's existence. Here where the writers and great philosofers and priests are forced to step aside and make space for the technoclogic investments. The so called 'story' of Jesus in which many choose to believe, is one of the many religions of the earth. I have never seen in history mankind trying to fight against a 'story' as hard as it fought against cristianity. You never see atheists who claim that the religion of Budha is false or Mohamed never existed, just because they have no interests, but because their parents tried to get them on this path to be like Him who sacrificed so much and took so little from us, it turned everyone from todays generation against religion. I dont know about other religions, and I am not a very convicted cristian, but I am totally against fighting a religion no matter what it implies. Muslims have the duty to sacrifice for their believes, and people respect that despite all the events, because it is a religion. However all that cristianity asks you is to love each other and to try to be like Him, not to worship him, and neither to sacrifice anything you have, but for your own good and if possible the good of your loved ones.

Cristianity has to be on of today's most combated religions and many young teenagers are rebelious and turn against it. Ignore the Church if you believe it is bad, just reconsider the religion as it suits your, Jesus never imposed himself or his religion, he welcomed all those who wanted to join, I dont know or care how you turned so against him, but he did nothing against you, he actually made you.

Yes he did

Simply because one hasn't seen it happen before in our time doesn't mean it never happened. Jesus was the son of God , and all things are possible with God. People nowadays have been resuscitated back to life, and although the span in time is quite different, God made it so. It definitely happened just as the Bible told.

Yes, Jesus Christ rose from the dead. WOW...How cool!

Yes Jesus rose from the dead. I am a Christian, have accepted by faith, Jesus Christ as my savior. My belief allows for my belief to encompass the Word of God, also. According to the bible, Jesus rose from the dead. I could not prove it scientifically, as many would like there to be scientific proof. I will say, though, many in Jesus day saw the miracles performed, and still did not believe He was the Son of God. Without faith in Jesus Christ, you cannot see the 'reality' of God. IMO.

He is Risen

The existence of Jesus is a fact. His death at the hands of Pilate is another. His disciples made the claim that Jesus was raised after three days. They preached the message of Jesus with boldness and died for their unwavering in Jesus' resurrection. People don't die for a lie. All other theories about what happened to the missing body of Jesus haven't held up.

More proof than the death of Socrates

There are over 500 eye witness accounts of those who have seen the resurrection of our Lord. Roman guards were actually told to lie about the resurrection. The disciples all died (except John, whom they attempted to kill and couldn't, so exiled him) horrible deaths. Now think about this, Peter denied Jesus three times on Good Friday for fear of death, yet was then later crucified upside down because he did not want to be crucified in the same manner as Christ. How does one go from fear to such boldness over a fable or lie? We never debate the manner in which Socrates died yet that was 400 years before Christ. Movies like Zeitgeist throw around many accusations such as the similarities between pagan gods and Jesus, yet when one actually studies those claims they are false. There is no pagan god that resembles Christ. Old Testament prophets told of the coming Messiah 500-700 years before Christ was crucified. They also did it with amazing accuracy of how he would be humble, ride on a donkey as being proclaimed king, denied, and pierced. For those that feel pity for us that believe, please don’t. Save the pity for yourselves because one day we all will stand before a just and holy God and have to give account of our lives. On that day many will say lord, lord, but Jesus will return with depart from me, I never knew you.

It is a historical fact

The resurrection appearances as recorded by the Gospels, the empty tomb, and the origins of the Christian faith all point to the resurrection of Jesus. Skeptics have provided no plausible alternative to the resurrection of Jesus. Those who refuse to accept the resurrection as historical fact are simply appealing to ignorance, and cannot reasonably explain any alternatives with facts.

Do you need proof?

Many people believe that physical evidence is needed to verify the existance of someone. However that is not true. What about your great great great great great grandmother (before the time of photographs) - I'm sure none of you have ever met you respective relative, however you are confident that she exists, not because you have verified it using physical evidence, but because logic simply depicts it.Therefore you don't need physical proof for something to be true, you just need to have some sort of evidence such as, in the case of the grandmother, she must have lived since you are alive today.

Happy are those who have not seen and yet have come to believe

I have not seen and yet I know without doubt that Jesus lived and died, and rose again. For those who say there is no proof that Jesus ever lived, I'm afraid you are incorrect. There is much documented proof, not only the biblical writings, but also in accounts of the time from other religions and peoples: Romans, Greeks, Jews. There is far more documentation that refers to Jesus than to Julius Caesar, and yet no one doubts that Julius Caesar lived. The Jewish traditions foretold of the coming of the messiah, and as foretold there were are still are, who wish to cast doubt on who He was and who He is today. But whatever you believe, there is no doubt in my mind that God loves you. He loves each and everyone of us individually, totally and passionately, and His son dying on the Cross and rising again is the ultimate proof of that Love. I cannot prove that He loves you, how do you prove anyone loves you, but that doesn't mean you are not loved.

First off, Jesus didnt rise from the dead because we don't have any proof that rising from the dead is possible. No one has done it before and it haven't been proven to be possible. Yes, Jesus is supposedly the son of god but no matter how special you are rising from the dead isnt possible.

The Roman Empire was notorious for their historical records, yet there is no historical evidence to support Jesus ever existed, let alone was executed and rose from the dead. Jesus was also not named Jesus, he was named Yeshua; there is no J in the Hebrew alphabet. The only records that even closely resembles a Yeshua who was crucified, takes place long after the formation of the catholic church. It drives me nuts when people point to such records, because the timeline is out of order.

Saying " He was the son of God makes it possible" is not proof. First you'd have to prove God. So that one is out. There is no proof to say that he did rise from the dead. The bible, sorry to say, does not count as proof either .

There is no evidence of such.

Frankly, there is no primary historical evidence Jesus even lived. The Jesus tale is most likely an amalgam of older savior myths from the region and the dozens of alleged "Messiahs" running around Jerusalem at the time. The correlation between the Jesus story and older mythological figures is striking, and he certainly isn't the first figure claimed to have risen from the dead as a "savior".

According to the Bible, no.

According to the Bible itself, there's ample proof that Jesus Christ did not rise from the dead.

"Then certain of the scribes and of the Pharisees answered, saying, Master, we would see a sign from thee. But he answered and said unto them, An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given to it, but the sign of the prophet Jonah: For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth." (Matthew 12:38-40).

The first question is, what condition was Jonah in when he was swallowed up by the whale? Secondly, what condition was he inside the whale? Presumably alive, because he came out of the whale to go spread the Word to the Ninevites after spending three days and three nights within the whale.

So the question then arises, what condition was Jesus in when he was placed inside the sepulchre, assuming what he said regarding the similarity with what happened to Jonah is true? If you believe he was dead, then where is the similarity between him and Jonah? Either Jesus Christ lied about it, or that he was alive when they put him into the sepulchre.

Then there's the story of when he entered the hall where he had the Last Supper, after the supposed resurrection.

"Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have. And when he had thus spoken, he shewed them his hands and his feet. And while they yet believed not for joy, and wondered, he said unto them, Have ye here any meat?And they gave him a piece of a broiled fish, and of an honeycomb. And he took it, and did eat before them." (Luke 24:39-43)

What was he trying to prove to his shocked and confused disciples? That he was a spirit? Did he look like a spirit? Does a spirit need to eat? Why did he have to assure them that he was not a spirit?

According to the Bible, a spirit has neither flesh nor bones, nor does a spirit require sustenance. It also states that once a man has become a spirit, he can never again become a man.

So based on these few points, I have come to the conclusion that Jesus Christ never rose from the dead. I have additional points regarding this issue, but I think the above two is sufficient enough to refute this claim.

There's A Little Something Called Science

This should be a common sense question. No one, in the history of humanity and science, has rose from the dead, and had their claim verified by aggressive peer review and evidence. We do not have the technology now to bring the dead back to life, and we very certainly did not have the technology 2000 years ago to raise the dead. All the biblical scholars that say he did are essentially believing a piece of paper that says "This paper is the one true paper because this paper says so."

No he did not!

Simply put! There is no evidence or proof that Jesus even lived, let alone existed! Despite the writings of Tacitus and Suetonious mentioning a "Chrestus," it is unknown what they mean, but it is unlikely to refer to a Jesus, and more likely to refer to the Christians. For Christians, the story of the resurrection is the cornerstone of their whole faith. Without the resurrection, the whole thing falls apart. And yet, they also go on to say it was a "miracle," whereupon "God" somehow brings Jesus back to life. Not very likely! In 1748, David Hume (1711-1776), published An Inquiry Concerning Human Understanding. In it he writes that miracles are "highly improbable," and "a violation of the Laws of Nature":

A miracle is a violation of the laws of nature; and as a firm and unalterable experience has established these laws, the proof against a miracle, from the very nature of the fact, is as entire as any argument from experience can possibly be imagined. Why is it more than probable, that all men must die; that lead cannot, of itself, remain suspended in the air; that fire consumes wood, and is extinguished by water; unless it be, that these events are found agreeable to the laws of nature, and there is required a violation of these laws, or in other words, a miracle to prevent them? Nothing is esteemed a miracle, if it ever happen in the common course of nature. It is no miracle that a man, seemingly in good health, should die on a sudden: because such a kind of death, though more unusual than any other, has yet been frequently observed to happen. But it is a miracle, that a dead man should come to life; because that has never been observed in any age or country. There must, therefore, be a uniform experience against every miraculous event, otherwise the event would not merit that appellation. And as a uniform experience amounts to a proof, there is here a direct and full proof, from the nature of the fact, against the existence of any miracle; nor can such a proof be destroyed, or the miracle rendered credible, but by an opposite proof, which is superior.

I disbelieve in the Jesus story just as I do Zeus, Thor, Odin, and others. It is highly unlikely that he rose at all, let alone lived. And when you consider that there were several "messiahs" running around the Roman Empire during the reign of Tiberius (and after) you just have to wonder. I am also inclined to think that a disbelief in the resurrection implies no afterlife. We will not live on eternally. All that is born must come to an end. Just think how Hume would look if he were alive today! If there were a Jesus (and I say "if"), he probably died like everyone else, but his delusional followers (and that fool Paul) invented a whole religion based on the myth of the "resurrection" of "Jesus."

No evidence to support the claim

Jesus was most probably the result of Jewish mid rash combined with the pagan mythology of the first century. People have rarely have any idea of how superstitious and ignorant most of the population was at that time. People often claim that because Christianity has survived 2000 years of scrutiny there must be some truth but that is highly problematic. It is only in the last 150 years that large numbers people have been able to scrutinize the contents of the bible, it's historicity and archaeological evidence. The sciences and the scientific method have been amazingly successful answering questions about biblical history, authenticity and authorship that god has been reduced to existing only in faith. Turns out that the universe can happened without a god.

Due to the Burden of Proof, no.

Because of lack of evidence, and by extension, the Burden of Proof, we go to the Null Hypothesis, where we flat-out deny the claim. It's quite simple. We never, under any circumstances, assume a claim to be true unless evidence for such a claim is given. Only then, can we actually credit the claim with any merit whatsoever.